PSS: Validate the backend or state store configurations described by plan files#37948
Draft
SarahFrench wants to merge 4 commits intomainfrom
Draft
PSS: Validate the backend or state store configurations described by plan files#37948SarahFrench wants to merge 4 commits intomainfrom
SarahFrench wants to merge 4 commits intomainfrom
Conversation
SarahFrench
added
the
no-changelog-needed
This comment was marked as outdated.
This comment was marked as outdated.
SarahFrench
force-pushed
the
pss/update-how-operations-use-backend-config-state
branch
from
94d4233 to
9a018e9
Compare
3 tasks
SarahFrench
force-pushed
the
pss/update-how-operations-use-backend-config-state
branch
from
9a018e9 to
d16ebe6
Compare
SarahFrench
force-pushed
the
pss/validate-backend-state-store-config-in-plans
branch
from
b44b360 to
c6922ef
Compare
SarahFrench
force-pushed
the
pss/update-how-operations-use-backend-config-state
branch
from
d16ebe6 to
f795158
Compare
SarahFrench
force-pushed
the
pss/validate-backend-state-store-config-in-plans
branch
from
c6922ef to
e3f20b8
Compare
…Backend, so the planfile's Backend struct isn't flagged as empty.
… the Backend config are set
…f a backend or state store is complete The alternative approach would be to change the existing `Backend` field in the `Plan` struct to be a pointer. I'm open to either option, but the approach of using an `Empty` method matches existing work in the `workdir` package when inspecting the backend state file, and that seems a similar use-case to inspecting the plan file.
…e store is complete when reading or writing a plan file
SarahFrench
force-pushed
the
pss/validate-backend-state-store-config-in-plans
branch
from
e3f20b8 to
45bac84
Compare
SarahFrench
changed the base branch from
pss/update-how-operations-use-backend-config-state
to
main
SarahFrench
commented
Dec 18, 2025
Comment on lines
113
to
114
| func Test_writeTfplan_validation(t *testing.T) { | ||
| cases := map[string]struct { |
Member
Author
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Needs cases covering the Backend validation, but backend validation covered in internal/plans/plan_test.go also.
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
1 participant
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
This PR is blocked by review of #37946, #37956, and #37957
Follows #37248
This PR adds validation to stop Terraform writing or using a planfile that has incomplete descriptions of the backend or state store configuration.
Target Release
N/A
Rollback Plan
Changes to Security Controls
Are there any changes to security controls (access controls, encryption, logging) in this pull request? If so, explain.
CHANGELOG entry